the roadmap for a grand bargain

8/9/2019 The Roadmap for a Grand Bargain

1/20

ECONOMIC POLICY PAPER SERIES 2010

THE ROADMAP FOR A GRAND BARGAINCOMMENTS ON A U.S. GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY

JAMES KUNDER AND JONATHAN M. WHITE


2/20

2010 Te German Marshall Fund o the United States. All rights reserved.

No part o this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any orm or by any means without permission in writingrom the German Marshall Fund o the United States (GMF). Please direct inquiries to:

Te German Marshall Fund o the United States1744 R Street, NWWashington, DC 20009

1 202 683 2650F 1 202 265 1662E in o@gm us.org

Tis publication can be downloaded or ree at http://www.gm us.org/publications/index.c m. Limited printcopies are also available. o request a copy, send an e-mail to in o@gm us.org.

GMF Paper SeriesTe GMF Paper Series presents research on a variety o transatlantic topics by staf, ellows, and partners o the GermanMarshall Fund o the United States. Te views expressed here are those o the author and do not necessarily represent the views o GMF. Comments rom readers are welcome; reply to the mailing address above or by e-mail to in o@gm us.org.

About GMFTe German Marshall Fund o the United States (GMF) is a non-partisan American public policy and grant-making institu-tion dedicated to promoting greater cooperation and understanding between North America and Europe.

GMF does this by supporting individuals and institutions working on transatlantic issues, by convening leaders to discussthe most pressing transatlantic themes, and by examining ways in which transatlantic cooperation can address a variety o global policy challenges.

Founded in 1972 through a gi rom Germany as a permanent memorial to Marshall Plan assistance, GMF maintains astrong presence on both sides o the Atlantic. In addition to its headquarters in Washington, DC, GMF has seven o ces inEurope: Berlin, Bratislava, Paris, Brussels, Belgrade, Ankara, and Bucharest.

About GMFs Economic Policy ProgramTe Economic Policy Program is an initiative o GMF dedicated to promoting cooperation between the United States and

Europe on domestic and international economic policies as vital instruments o global prosperity, especially or the poorand those afected by shi s in the global economy. Te United States and Europe account or more than 40 percent o worldeconomic activity, close to $20 trillion in goods and services on an annual basis. Given the size and importance o thisrelationship, GMFs Economic Policy Program seeks to ensure that the bene ts o globalization are distributed equitably and airly. Trough in-depth research, targeted grantmaking, strategic convening, and outreach to key policymakers and themedia, the program supports transatlantic leadership at the critical nexus o economic policy, trade, development assistance,and management o domestic sectors such as agriculture.

Cover photo: A tea harvester in Rwanda.


3/20

he Roadmap For A Grand BargainComments on a U.S. Global Development Strategy

Economic Policy Paper Series

July 2010

J K J M. WT G M F U S

J K S R F w G M F U S (GMF). H z x w

. P , M . K U.S. A I D(USAID), U.S. z U.S. .

J M. W S P O G M F U S (GMF). H GMF A E P j k w k GMF , ,

w G M F U S .

I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

W U S N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M U S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

E E U.S. S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

R G B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


4/20

he Roadmap For A Grand Bargain 1

j w U.S. P S D GD P (PSD) W H , Q D D R w (QDDR)

U.S. D S U.S. A I D , C

x A .

U S , , w ,

w ,

GB k A

.

U S w (ODA),

k . j

z U.S. . F ,

x , U.S.

.A ,

, U S x w w $ 5

.A ?C ? F ? H w

? M ? B ? A U.S. ,

j 9 .

C U.S. w

z U.S. . ,

, - w ,

A OECD, U.S. ODA $ 5 9.

q , w U.S. . W , U.S.

w C ,

A , U.S. . -

G B z z U.S. w

.

w . I C , A ,

U.S. , , . I

S U N MD G (MDG ) R w, w

k w , U S k . I

w . A w

,

w . U S

.

k, w .

Introduction1

There is no single

statement or set of objectives that clearly

summarizes the goalof U.S. developmentassistance.


5/20

The German Marshall Fund of the United States2

T y w c U.S.v y k w US k cc w v

c : . ., w c wk? W w cc k k ? W

y k q , w x y c x, v U.S. v

c y , b c :

H w b b c v c

c c . O -by , b ck c y c ccb k , y c ,

- , wc v c B

, c M w P y y 90 c c v U.S.v c ;

H w b b c v c w

c c y c .C y, c w US v , c cy, c ,

y v by C P c v

U.S. v c w v c

B S L k H , MDG ;

W q c b c c y. S -b

c j c , w by cv b y, w y ?

S c y by w y v b y-

v c v ;

W c U.S. v w w c . W

j c k b ck b

U.S. v y c . F c , w

c U.S. b , k cy, v

w , y c y v w - ?

Ab b , y , U S b x w w w $25 b

v v b . W cy c y

x y , w v c v

w w v c w 3 T v y c

cc b y x c by U.S. C w c

c v by U.S. v

. I c c cy k , v , w k

c v c c b c A c y A 2009, G vAcc b y O c (GAO) c

U.S. v v c v , v -w

c y, c w cc 4

3 I C v

GAO, U.S. v v yc c . H w v , y c cc ( w c w ),

, v v c . U.Sv y cv c y U.S. v .

4 Foreign Aid Reform: Comprehensive Strategy, Interagency Coor-dination, and Operational Improvements Would Bolster Current Efforts; GAO-09-102; 17 A 2009

Why a Unified Strategy Is Needed2

Absent a global,unified strategy for

development aid, theUnited States is not

able in simple terms to explain what we

do with the $25 billionin development aid

investments abroad.


6/20

The Roadmap For A Grand Bargain 3

T k w b y, c

c , c , c ,c ,

. T U S y c c c y b

k w w . I v w, y c v c

q : W , c y, A cx c U.S. v c v

w w ?5

I w c w q , v y

cc x c . I w c c c w x c U.S. v

, U.S. b w c b , c c

c v . H w w c cc ? W b

c c W ?W y c

j c c ? T , y q , w c c

b c b , y v . I c v cc ,

v c y b

5 I c c U.S. v c ; . ., v U.S.

- y v v c , c c, c c c

. T U S c y v c v y , w k . S c c b

c , b c y c . A , U S v c y

c y v , c b y. T c -

c y c w c b U.S. - , b w b b cc

c y c v y . I , v y v c

w b v U.S. , v - y c c

w .

In order to achieve success, thedevelopment communmust begin the aidreform process with aconsensus on globaloutcomes, a consensu

on what success woullook like.

c w c bc , c w cc wk k . A y c v

c v y v c v y-

c c c c .

T , b , c -b y y c y, b b ,

U S c y y k. W b c c 140

b U.S. F A c

Ac 1961 ,A c v v b b ck c y.


7/20

he German Marshall Fund of the United States4

w U S k w . E

, k ,

w , ) ; )w ; 3) ;

, 4) .

The U.K. Department for InternationalDevelopment

U k U.S.

, U.K. D ID (DFID) k

. DFID w

5.6 k U.K. I

D A , w S S w

k .7 : DFID

9 w .U k x U.S. w

, , , U.K.

w j j , - .8 W DFID x

, - . A

6 ://www. . . k/A -DFID/Q k- - -DFID/W -w - - -w -w - /

7 I D A (DFID U.K. C S S I

D .)

8 I D A .

Models of a Unified Strategy3 w U.K. P k ,

w .

The Millennium Challenge Corporation

A MC C (MCC). I ,

k w w . MCC

U.S. . NMCC B k 7 , M

w

. I -

- . I

MCC , w . MCC C

w , w ,

, MCC

, , z

, MCC C w .

w j

.

The U.S. Agency for International Development(health sector)

A w x , z

x U.S. A I D (USAID),

Unlike the complex

U.S. aid systemwhere development,

iplomacy, and security priorities are not

clearly delineated,in the U.K. there are

demarcation linesbetween development

objectives and other policy objectives, such

as commercial and

eo-strategic or security interests.


8/20


. w

w w k k . w k kw

z w ( . .,

). k x , USAID

w j 5

5

, w G P SB. D

z z , w

w .


9/20


I U S w , w w ? W

:

Clarity of Mission: w

w U.S. ,, , . A

w w k k( . ., ) w

C . w

k E ,

w

. I , P O w w w U

S w .

Measurable Impact: w

w.

q w w j

/ q USAID . O

w Cx

Ex .

W , DC .

Systematic Focus on Development:

- . C , U

S w ( ESF ), w

The Essential Elementsof a U.S. Strategy4

j .9

B j : -

w w j , -

U.S. (

C

U.S. k .

Flexibility and Partnerships:

- , U.S.

w x w U S

USAID x w .

,

, , . I

w , -

( ). D -

j k w

, w , x

9 O w k fun-damental , instrumental , diplomatic assistance. F

k j . I

. D w w

j . S R B S A National Strategy for Global Development: Protecting Americaand Our World Through Sustainable Security , C A

P , M 9.

D k L , U.S. S , F A N w E , J 8, .

The strategy mustbe straightforward

and clear to unify effort within the U.S.

government andalign plans, budgets,

resources, and

operations. A clearly stated vision of what

success would look like will help to focus

and garner public andCongressional support.


10/20


L k w , - , , ,

. w , ,

NGO w .

Viable Nation-States and Societies: W MDG

,

U.S. , .W w w

k - , w

, US

-

. E q , -

w

. w

I , w - q W

, outcomes , k

-USG , w .

Ending aid dependencyrequires an integrated,cross-sector approachthat focuses on buildinnational capacity tocontinue developmentinvestments withnationally generatedresources.

, , , .

F , k U.S.

, w k .

H w , z U.S. A C - ,

MDG , - w U S

. G B , U.S. -

, w ,, - ,

.


11/20


D U.S. Ex , C , ?W w .

w Ex C ,

w U.S. . M ,

U.S. , x , U.S. .

w k :) USAID )

U.S. S D O F A .

k, USAIDspider graphs ( k w - k ),

, , q .

x w x : H , B , E S ,

P ( x , 4- 5). W ? I ,

USAID ,

U.S. 9

: x G J D ; I P ; x E G w .3

F x , x w

w (z ) w ( ).

.

S , , q ,

3 S w , H

8 .

w w ( x , 6).

k, O A country category system ,

:

.Restrictive countries ( k NK

-

.Rebuilding nations ( k H

w U.S. ,

z , );

3. Developing countries ( w - k B , w

, w , );

4. Transforming countries ( k ES , w w

w -

w ;

5. Sustaining Partnership countries ( -- k P

U.S. ).

-

, , w

The Roadmap for a Grand Bargain5

This Grand Bargain should serve asthe template for

etermining how USAIDis organized, how it

trains, motivates, and gauges performance

of its staff, what levelsof U.S. development

sistance are required,and what programs

deserve priority resources across the

ntire U.S. government.


12/20


.4

W ,

- w - .

W k , w w - U.S.

:

The U.S. development strategy is to ensurethat, by 2025, all rebuilding and developing nations achieve transforming status, and that 50 percent of those nations achieve sustaining partner status.

I , U.S. z

, x , ,, w

: (w U.S. A C

) w

. G B w

USAID z , w , , , w U.S.

q , w

U.S. . w k

4 E - , - x

. , , - . F

, - , . G w

k - x .

- w 4 j .5

H w w G B ? w

k C , Ex , U.S. ( x ).

F C , U.S. j x w

w $ 5 .

; z

j . A -

U.S. w

C . W HIV/AIDS, , ,

? w

w , /

W . C , C

w w ( k HIV )

- .

S -

5 z x, -, , w , ,

, , , . A -

, k , x x -w .

H w , USG ,

- - , -, , w ,

- .

In short, in contrast tothe current amorphousbudget allocationprocess, the proposed

strategy would providea needs-basedand performance-based, quantitatively comparable basis for beginning the budgetprocess.


13/20


, , MDG w - k ,

C .

F U.S. Ex P , S S , USAIDA , w O M B w

q.

, U.S. w k w -

. B U.S. w

. S k w

w - w w k w k

. U.S. w w ,

,

.F U.S. ,

w k .

I ,

w , j

A NGO z .M ,

q z k ,

w NGO w w k ,

w U.S. z x .

, w w U.S.

. C Ex

U.S. . F G B w C

Ex w q q U.S. . C

w , Ex

6

Ex q , C

x .

A w. C

,

W H , , w

HIV/AIDS. U.S. ,

, .

- . W w

w , w w k w

6 R w q k , ,

w - , x , ,

E USAID M D

,

. B , w

, w k z

, w w k, w w x .

There is the essentialneed to design specificprograms from a field-

based perspectivewith local government

priorities and civilsociety input to ensuresustainability and witha full awareness of the

contributions of other ateral and multilateral

donors.


14/20


w , - w x .

-

U.S. (x ). A , U.S.

w

. I , w q

w . , U.S. ,

z

w . I ,

, w -

- , q .

C , q

, w w. A w , w

, w x . C

- w .

- w

w w .

A , U.S. w w j

w ,

, . F , USAID k w , w

.I ,

w , w j ,

, w w ( . .,

w , w ,, ).7

7 O x MCC EU - .


15/20


W U.S. k q . M P

w j E W W II. B x ,U.S. S S k

, . C , U.S.

4 j 4 w

, w 5 U.S. .

L k A ? I w S A ? P

q W w w . N w ; U.S.

, .O , w w

j , w U S k

w . M w

w k , , - , k

, - ,

, U.S. . N C Ex

w q .

I , ,q , - U.S.

w :

A USAID- w C , Ex , , NGO ,

, w U.S.

QDDR ;

C (

, w ,

, z w x U

);

x w ) U.S.

;

U x

- ;

x w

A , w

A C, ( )

;

U w

.

A G B w , w ,

w k

, k U.S. .

, - w

q w

Conclusion6

A Grand Bargainnational development

strategy wouldprovide a common

operating framework to development

professionals on the ground and serve asthe basis for building,

pproving, and tracking U.S. government

development budgets.


16/20


U.S. . w ,

C , Ex U.S. , w

.


17/20


Appendix 17

R 5, w 5 . W B k I , GW B k, W D I ( 5), D B 6 ( 5); F H , F

5), F P ( 5); UNDP, H D R ( 6); UN, S W C C E L w P , 6 E P I x ( 6).

Income Inequality, 4.5

Income, 1.0

Health andEducation

Expenditure, 0.8

Literacy Rate, 0.5 Under 5 Mortality, 2.0

Li eExpectancy, 2.5

Environment, 1.5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Political Rights, 3.0

GovernmentEfectiveness, 2.0

Control o Corruption, 1.5

Rule o Law, 2.0

IndependentMedia, 2.0

CivilLiberties, 3.0

0

1

2

3

4

5

TransformingCountries

Developing: Bangladesh

Business Environment, 3.5

FDI, 1.0

In ation, 4.5

Economic Growth, 3.5

FiscalBalance, 2.5

RegulatoryQuality, 1.5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Governing Justly and Democratically (gap=0.8)

Investing in People (gap=0.8)

Economic Growth (gap=-0.1)




Income per Capita, 1.0

Health andEducation

Expenditure, 1.5


Li eExpectancy, 1.5

Environment, 2.0

0

1

2

3

4

5




Rule o Law, 1.0


CivilLiberties, 1.7

0

1

2

3

4

5

DevelopingCountries

DevelopingCountries

DevelopingCountries

Rebuilding: Haiti


FDI, 1.0

In ation, 1.5 Economic Growth, 0.5


0

1

2

3

4

5



Economic Growth (gap=1.3)


18/20



Income, 3.5

Health andEducation

Expenditure, 4.0


Li eExpectancy, 4.5

Environment, 4.5

0

1

2

3

4

5



Control o

Corruption, 3.0

Rule o Law, 3.5 IndependentMedia, 4.0

CivilLiberties, 5.0

0

1

2

3

4

5

OECD Average

OECD Average

Sustaining: Poland


FDI, 3.0

In ation, 5.0


FiscalBalance, 1.5


0

1

2

3

4

5




OECD Average


Income, 1.5

Health andEducation

Expenditure, 2.5


Li eExpectancy, 3.5

Environment, 3.5

0

1

2

3

4

5




Rule o Law, 2.5


CivilLiberties, 3.7

0

1

2

3

4

5

SustainingCountries

Transforming: El Salvador


FDI, 1.5

In ation, 5.0


FiscalBalance, 2.0


0

1

2

3

4

5




SustainingCountries

SustainingCountries


19/20

The German Marshall Fund of the United States16

Appendix 28


20/20

O F F I C E S

Washington Berlin Bratislava ParisBrussels Belgrade Ankara Bucharest

www. mf .

the roadmap for a grand bargain

Documents